People v. Levy

140 A.D.2d 630, 528 N.Y.S.2d 669, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5705
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 23, 1988·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

The trial court properly allowed the complainant to describe the perpetrator’s appearance at the time of the crime. The complainant’s recollection of the perpetrator’s appearance during the gunpoint robbery was relevant to the issue of identification and did not constitute improper bolstering of his identification of the defendant in court (see, People v Sanders, 108 AD2d 316, affd 66 NY2d 906; People v Riviello, 111 AD2d 878, 879).

Furthermore, although the prosecutor should not have inquired as to the description which the robbery victim gave to the police, this single isolated question did not deprive the defendant of a fair trial, and a new trial is not warranted (see, People v Osuna, 65 NY2d 822; People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230). Weinstein, J. P., Rubin, Spatt and Sullivan, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

People v. Levy, 140 A.D.2d 630, 528 N.Y.S.2d 669, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5705 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

140 A.D.2d 630 (People v. Levy) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Cruz
160 A.D.2d 893 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)